Julien Abeille (jabeille) a écrit :
Hi all,To be sure I understand: is the lowpan link concept different from the link definition in IPv6? link - a communication facility or medium over which nodes can communicate at the link layer, i.e., the layer immediately below IP. Examples are Ethernets (simple or bridged), PPP links, X.25, Frame Relay, or ATM networks as well as Internet-layer (or higher-layer) "tunnels", such as tunnels over IPv4 or IPv6 itself.
Excellent point! I think no, the LoWPAN link shouldn't be any different from the IPv6 link definition listed above. Which RFC is that btw?
However, the wireless quirk is this famous non-transitivity wireless problem (or 'hidden' terminal problem) which says that a set of nodes which can communicate at link-layer pairwise can't necessarily communicate at link-layer from any node to any node - i.e. there can be three nodes forming two different "linked" links. This effectively makes the above IPv6 link definition irrelevant to any wireless link.
Were the above IPv6 link definition to say "a medium over which each node can communicate at the link layer to each other node", or similar, then the wireless quirk wouldn't apply and we'd be happily be using that IPv6 link definition, I think.
Alex _______________________________________________ 6lowpan mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
